Supreme Court dismisses petition seeking lifting of ban on Ahmednassir
While dismissing the petition, the court noted that the petitioner lacked legal standing to bring the case as it was flawed procedurally
The Supreme Court has struck out a petition seeking review on the decision by the apex court to recuse itself from cases involving Senior Counsel Ahmednassir Abdullahi and advocates at his law firm.
In a ruling delivered today, the court upheld its decision to bar the counsel from appearing before them following his attacks on the bench judges on social media.
“For the afforested reasons, we make orders that the Notice of Motion dated 30th January 2025 and filed on 4th February 2025 is hereby struck out,” Chief Justice Martha Koome ruled.
While dismissing the petition, Koome, who delivered the verdict, noted that the petitioner, Julius Miiri, lacked legal standing to bring the case as it was flawed procedurally.
“The filing of the miscellaneous application before us is procedurally flawed,” she stated, adding that the applicant was not a party in the original proceedings, and he had not sought to be enjoined.
In the ruling, the Supreme Court noted that the affected lawyers in Ahmednassir’s law firm had not filed an application seeking the review of the orders.
According to the apex court, the letter by the associates of the Senior Counsel’s law firm was a mere correspondence rather than a formal pleading to have the orders reviewed.
Koome noted that the recusal orders were specific to cases in which Ahmednassir and his firm are involved as they can appear on other matters before the court.
“The recusal order only relates to them when they are representing the firm of the 2nd respondent (Ahmednassir) in court,” the court said in the ruling.
The ruling comes after a petition was filed in January to have the Supreme Court review its orders to recuse Ahmednassir and set them aside.
In his application, Julius Miiri stated that the orders were unfair as they were affecting lawyers in Ahmednassir’s firm together with their clients.
He argued that the orders were disproportionate and violated the law firm’s partners and associates as they were not directly involved in the alledged misconduct by the senior counsel.
Miiri wanted the judges to review their decision and serve justice.
A year ago, the court permanently barred Ahmednasir from appearing before it following his continued attacks on judges and the judiciary.
“Given the foregoing, this court decides that henceforth and from the date of this communication, you shall have no audience before the court, either by yourself, an employee of your law firm, or any other person holding brief for you or acting according to your instructions,” the court ordered in January last year.
The court accused the lawyer of conducting a broadcast, print, and social media campaign, accusing it and its judges of corruption, incompetence, and outright bribery.
Ahmednassir, who is also a former commissioner of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC), has been notably outspoken in condemning judges for alleged corruption without specifying any names.
The court, having previously warned the lawyer to exercise caution and refrain from imposing sanctions, was compelled to make a stern decision.
Despite the earlier caution, the lawyer remained undeterred, leading the court to invoke the orders.
